The Tiananmen Paradigm

If you scratch the scabs of socialism which are located all over the dirty liberal body politic, you will reveal that which lurks beneath the surface and it isn’t pretty.. The liberals seem to have three major “targets” in their sixty year “War on America”. The schools, the church and the message..

The liberal “War on Schools” has taken a two-pronged approach. One has been an extension of their old “War on Humanity” known as slavery. The other has been the transformation of the nation’s schools to “indoctrination stations”. One prong deals with their chattel, the other with future underlings and more importantly, the next generation of liberal elitists, alabaster all..

When the Democrats finally got the message that slavery wasn’t going to be accepted any longer by the rest of America, they had to devise an alternative plan to CONTROL those that used to be so easily controlled by the physical shackles of slavery.

Understanding that “control” also contained a very strong element of the laceration of ones self esteem, the Democrats turned to handouts as their latest versions of their popular ball and chains and they utilized their “definitional inversion” to call these new shackles “benefits”.

Moreover, in order to insure that these “benefits” would exist permanently (and to also GROW exponentially ad infinitum..) these “benefits” HAD to be made into RIGHTS..

The liberals quickly understood that “physical” bondage was much messier and less certain than “mental” bondage”, yet “mental” bondage was MUCH easier to reinforce than “physical” bondage.. The liberals discovered that they could accomplish the same goal of enslaving people without the fire hoses, the baseball bats or the negative press coverage.. (More on that last topic later in the show..)

The smug sanctimony of “mental” bondage has allowed the liberals to sleep well at night for generations.. These handouts also served to preserve the “careers” of an unhealthy number of liberal politicians who then “reward” the enslaved with more “benefits” in exchange for their vote..

As well, the Democrats knew that “knowledge is power” so it was time to focus in on the citadels of “knowledge”, the nation’s “schools”..

At the “schools”, the next generation of white Democrats were sufficiently marinated in the quagmire of liberal indoctrination and the next generation of minority indentured servants all had their minds conveniently destroyed by the old school liberal “teachers”..

The biggest discrepancy between these two distinctly different groups of people is that the liberal “color” line ended at the steps of the nation’s colleges.. The minorities were “taught” very early on in their educational “process” that education is a “sell out” and its for the “white man”.. On the other hand, the white liberal elitists went on to learn how to tell everyone else that they feel is beneath them that which is best for them..

The SAME people who pretend to be the minority’s “protectors” intentionally bring about this disparity. They use “progressive projection” to protect this shameful behavior as they proactively accuse everyone else of exactly what it is that they are utilizing in order to keep order..

The left’s “War on God” has been based not only upon being VERY organized, it has been enabled by their demonic desire to take ANY situation that has ANY potential to make either the church or ANY of its representatives, real or imaginary, look bad and to then use it as another truncheon of opportunism..

In order to put the left’s “War on God” into its proper perspective, which also puts the feral beasts of the left into a proper perspective, we have to clarify. This is, and has always been and always will be, a “War on CERTAIN churches”.. You will notice that ANY of the “churches” where they “worship” porcupines or other such oddities, “churches” where the RULEBOOK isn’t really adhered to, these “churches” are fine within the liberal universe..

As well, the left prostrates itself before ANY “religion” where the adherents like to crawl about on all fours and they lose their heads over their beliefs. Wait a minute, lets change that to read: they make OTHERS who don’t believe lose their heads.. Yes, the hyper-sensitive “believers” who sport attractive explosive vests that spontaneously detonate for the “cause” are also on the liberal “pay no mind” list. Their little terrorist teapots are sacrosanct to the oblivious leftists..

Make no mistake the liberals despise God. They also despise the church because the church is the mortal representative of God and His Word. This is unacceptable to the liberals because they truly believe that they are God themselves..

By destroying the “church”, the liberals create a “compassion” vacuum which they propose to fill with their own unique self serving version.. All of the benevolent services available to the poor, those beset by disaster et cetera, now have to turn to the leftist god of government when the liberals succeed in eliminating the church..

The liberals third prong is that of “dictating the message”, thus the urgency to take the “impartial” out of the national media.

The “new and improved” liberal “impartial” media has an almost complete monopoly upon the airwaves. When the “talk radio” phenomenon erupted, the liberals immediately began to create a “Fairness Doctrine” in order to silence the dissent of those who refuse to fall into the fifth column.. The liberals HAVE to have the ONLY “message” because if there is any other message, the falsity and the flimsiness of the liberal “argument” collapses like a house of marked cards.. This is why the left NEVER wants to debate, they MUST silence you..

Even as of a few days ago, Steve “Kneepads” Kroft, one of the many media whelps, confided that in relation to OWEbama, “I think he knows that we’re not going to play got ‘cha with him..” (Real Clear Politics) Really.. That is about as bloody obvious as saying that Michael Moore is obese and that the Democrats are just “new and improved” Communists..

“Not going to play got ‘cha”, that is precisely the point from a number of perspectives. If the media isn’t going to play “got ‘cha”, then who will? Playing “got ‘cha” USED TO BE the media’s role within America. Since no one within the “impartial” media wishes to play “got ‘cha” with OWEbama, he has a wide open field with which to run as he knows that the “impartial” media will provide all of the necessary suppressing fire that he needs in order to continue his “War on America”..

We have become “Tank Man”. On June 5, 1989, during the Tiananmen Square uprising, one lone protestor stood in front of a column of tanks. As the tanks would move to one side, so would “Tank Man”.. Eventually, he was pulled to the side by other protestors, never to be heard from again.

We are living within the “Tiananmen Paradigm”. We need to stand in front of the liberals and say “NO”.

For those not fond of seeing history repeat itself, please keep in mind that these three “goals” of the modern day liberals are the same as the goals of the old world Communists..

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

18 responses to “The Tiananmen Paradigm”

Larry,
Great article and all too true. I believe the liberals/progressives have made a huge tactical error and moved too quickly (especially in regard to the 2nd Amendment). There are still too many of the real “old school” Americans left who are saying NO to them and will stand in front of the tanks. There is a lot of resistance building up all over the country. I’ve always felt that if the right buttons were pushed, people would wake up.

Great article Larry. I have to wonder if I would be as intelligent if I had been educated under the Ghimmy Carter’s Department of Education. They are the main problem why American student are being dumbed down. It seems the more money we give them, the dumber student become. Its also befitting that their headquarters is at the Lyndon Baines Johnson building in the cesspool that’s known as Washington, District of Corruption. George W. Bush put them there.

I thought I would dig a little to uncover the facts about the Department of Education.

Although the Department was created sometime in the late 1800’s, it stayed stagnate until Carter thought he’d “fix” education. The Republicans opposed the re-creation of the Department of Education by were out voted by the Democratic majority. The Republicans saw the new Department as unconstitutional. They had argued that the Constitution does not mention “education”, and deemed it an unnecessary and illegal federal bureaucratic intrusion into local affairs. Carter’s plan was to transfer most of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare’s education-related functions to the Department of Education.. Carter created a cabinet seat to his Administration.

The liberals and Democrats see the department as constitutional under the Commerce Clause (they see everything falls under the Commerce Clause), and that the funding role of the Department is constitutional under the Taxing and Spending Clause. The National Education Association supported the bill, while the American Federation of Teachers opposed it at that time. My have times changed.

It’s interesting that Congress did not include the Department of the Interior’s Indian education programs, and the Department of Labor’s education and training programs, Headstart, the Department of Agriculture’s school lunch and nutrition programs. I’ll never understand the federal government. They pick and choose who gets what and never sees the negative. They continue to teak certain “programs” when they need votes to be elected by Unions and the “needy,” when most of us know no solution will ever be found so long as the liberals want to control all of us. If they never find a solution, there will always be the “needy” and they can continue to spend needless amounts of taxpayer dollars.

We all know they will never find a permanent solution because that means we will not need the federal government’s intrusion anymore.

I think we should included the Iranians who held up signs for Obama and the United States to help them with their corrupt religious leaders and a corrupt President. I will never understand why Obama remain silent or why Congress also chooses to remain silent, when most Americans wanted to help the citizens there. I remember that young woman who was murdered in front of her parents and the crowd. She’s right up there with the young “gentleman” who stood before the tank in defiance and that President Bush at least acknowledge the protest.

After listening to Charles Krauthammer covered Hillary Clinton’s reign as Secretary of State and the failures like the above, she really did not do that great of a job. I honestly thought she would be far worse, but I have to agree with him that she basically failed as Secretary of State and I’m not sure if it’s her failures or Obama’s. I guess its both. I fear John Kerry will be far worse and more dangerous for the citizens who serve our Consulates and Embassies overseas and those who live overseas. Pray to God for their safety.

Just more liberal failures over liberal failures and they sit back and blame the Republicans for “their” failures. I’m sick of listening to them. I’m sick to death of Obama blaming them for just about everything since the dawn of man. The Republicans had better get their act together because Americans our looking for leadership not political rhetoric. And we are get nothing. Stop listening to the politicians, Obama, the liberals and start listening to the people you are suppose to represent. Don’t be afraid of them and start being afraid of US.

Regarding the Educational Claus, to be honest it should be called the Santa Claus and we could put many more deparments uner that Claus, but that wouldn’t allow for all the extra cabinet posts the Head Honcho wants. It really is out of control. Great article Larry and is so plain you’d think anyone could understand, but not liberals or lefties. They see and believe only that which they wish for.

Absolutely ! Because they will spend their ill gotten paychecks, thus adding to the economy — we do want economic growth, don’t we ? Afterall, if ‘workfare’ is preferred over plain old ‘welfare’ , then federal employee paychecks should be better than plain old ‘stimulus’ spending, since at the very least, the country at leaste gets ‘something’ rather than ‘nothing’ for all of the money that is spent ( or wasted ) .

And, by having an ever expanding federal work force, the gov’t. will be stronger, afterall, isn’t ‘bigger better ‘ ? At least that’s what some TV commercials espouse.

And, with more and more people under his command, the POTUS will become stronger and stronger – which is something that our enemies should note.

And we also need ” comphrehensive immigration reform ” , so that we can grow our population as large as possible, since once again- ‘bigger is better’.
Want proof – just look at China , with billions of people, it is a force with which to be reconned. And, BTW it’s economy is growing !

As always, BIGGER IS BETTER !

Want more proof ? Once again may I refer you to TV commercials – for
Cialis and Viagra.

For those who believe bigger is not always better, take comfort in the fact that the above is just a LITTLE Saturday Sarcasm.

BTW, speaking of silence – where is Benghazigate ? Perhaps overshadowed by the manufactured crisis known as $85 billion in spending cuts.
As they say inChicago – if you can’t take advantage of a crisis , then manufasture one. And, don’t let a good crisis ‘go to waste’ .

Benghazi: Behind the Scenes (Part I)
This is part one of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. In this part, he provides important background, and explains this administration is engaged in a massive cover-up.

DH: It’s been a while since we’ve discussed Benghazi. What have you heard lately?

II: Before I answer that, I want to get a few things off my chest. Every politician, whether it’s a congressman senator, diplomat, or their spokespeople and the media are lying to the American public every time they call the location of the attack a consulate. It was not. There was absolutely no diplomatic consulate in Benghazi. None. Words are important here. They can create a wrong image, an incorrect picture of what was really going on. The property where our Ambassador and other Americans were murdered was a rented villa consisting of a primary residence with a couple of outbuildings behind the actual house. The reason they’re still calling it a consulate is to subtly divert any questions about our activities there.

DH: Let’s go over this again; exactly what was taking place at Benghazi?
II: As I said, the place where the attack happened is one of the largest, one of the most active CIA operation centers in North Africa, if not in the entire Middle East. It was not a diplomatic station. It was a planning and operations center, a logistics hub for weapons and arms being funneled out of Libya. Unlike the embassy in Tripoli, there was limited security in Benghazi. Why? So the operation did not draw attention to what was going on there.

DH: So in reality there were no actual security issues?

II: Oh yes, there were, in Tripoli. Diplomatic cables show that. But it was for the embassy in Tripoli, the Ambassador and the diplomatic staff in general, not specifically for the Benghazi location for two reasons. First, the Benghazi location was a CIA operation, not a diplomatic one. Visible security at that location would draw unwanted attention there. They had to blend in. Remember, the villa was located in a somewhat residential area, sort of like the suburbs. Secondly, additional manpower was not needed there, at this CIA center, as the operation was already winding down.

DH: I know you’ve gone over this before, but let’s get into the specifics of the operation at Benghazi.

II: Good, I want to be clear. After Gaddafi was taken out, there was the matter of his weapons and arms that were hidden all over Libya, including chemical weapons – gas weapons. According to Obama and Hillary Clinton, we were in Libya to collect and destroy these weapons to make for a ‘safer’ Libya. That’s what they were telling the American public. That’s not really what was going on, though, and it seems like all of the other nations except the average American knew it. Anyway, you can find pictures and videos of weapons caches being destroyed, but that is strictly for the public’s consumption.
What was really happening, before Gaddafi’s body was even cold, is that we had people locating caches of weapons, separating the working from those that weren’t, and making a big show of destroying the weapons, but only the weapons that were useless. The working weapons were being given to Islamic terrorists. They were being funneled through Libya, crisscrossing Libya on a Muslim Brotherhood managed strategic supply route. In fact, Michael Reagan called it the modern day equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in a recent article he wrote, and he is correct.

The entire arms and weapons running operation was headquartered in Benghazi, The weapons were actually being shipped out of Libya from the port city of Dernah, located about a hundred miles east of Benghazi. That was the ‘choke point’ of the weapons being shipped out. Remember the Lusitania? Think in those terms, ships carrying weapons hid among ‘humanitarian aid.’ By the time of the attacks, an estimated 30-40 million pounds of arms were already transported out of Libya.

From there, the weapons were being sent to staging areas in Turkey near the Syrian border, for use by the Free Syrian Army and other ragtag terrorist groups to fight against Assad. The objective was and still is to destabilize the Assad government.

Why Syria, why not Iran?

II: It’s both, but Syria is the primary target here for this operation. First, look at the bigger picture, look at the so-called “Arab Spring.” Who benefits and by default, who doesn’t? Who is the architect for what’s going on throughout the Middle East and North Africa? Whose agenda is being implemented? To specifically address Benghazi, though, look at the bigger picture here and what is trying to be accomplished.

The Obama administration is playing the role of Saudi Arabia’s private army. I think if Americans knew this, they would be outraged. Our service men and women are being sold out as mercenaries for the wants and desires of the Royal family, for the Saudi’s interests. It’s about religious dominance and oil. Who is really benefiting from, say, what’s going on in Egypt? Mubarak is out, and the Muslim Brotherhood is in. Who does that benefit? Saudi Arabia.
Look at what we see happening in Egypt. Destabilization. Do you think the Russians want that? Hell no. Syria is Russia’s red line in the sand, as you earlier wrote. If Syria is lost to the Muslim Brotherhood by the actions of Obama, Hillary Clinton and others in this administration, what happens? Well, it will have an adverse impact on Russia from a military standpoint. They will likely lose access to their Mediterranean deep water port in Syria, which is Tartus.

But think further – three dimensionally. Russia is still the world’s largest oil producer, and that’s Russia’s primary source of income. Then there’s Turkey, adjacent to Syria. A large amount of Russian oil and gas, consumed by the West, flows through Turkey, which is also a player in this operation.

So, the destabilization of Syria which is exactly what Obama and Clinton are trying to do, presents a direct military and economic threat to Russia. Assad at least has kept things in check in Syria. Can you imagine Assad being replaced by someone like Morsi? That would strike at the very heart of Russia’s economic health and military capabilities. Think of what’s at stake here. Do Americans want a regional war? World War III? Has Obama or Clinton asked the American people if this is what they want?

Make no mistake, we are doing the bidding for Saudi Arabia. The U.S., NATO and other allies are engaged in a proxy war with Iran and Russia.

What about Assad’s war crimes?

Assad is no angel, but don’t be fooled by the death toll attributed to him. Now this is important. Remember the first Gulf War? In the run up to Desert Storm, a young woman testified before the Human Rights Caucus – she only testified under her first name, which was Nayirah. Remember that she testified that Iraqi soldiers were taking infants from incubators in Kuwait, leaving them to die? Her testimony was supposedly confirmed by Amnesty International. Her testimony went viral, and every war hawk in the U.S. government cited her testimony, saying we needed to right the wrongs, the inhumanity. It was all one big lie!

After Desert Storm, it was revealed that Nayirah’s last name was Al-Sabah, and she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Her testimony was part of a publicity campaign organized by Citizens for a Free Kuwait, which was run by Hill & Knowlton, a PR firm out of New York. People must learn the back story.

So we see a body count attributed to Assad. Who’s doing the killing, Assad’s people? Maybe at times, but the Free Syrian Army and other groups are doing most of the slaughter. It’s one huge ‘false flag’ operation and the media is selling it hard. And Americans are buying it, just like the testimony of the girl from Kuwait.

It’s one big lie being told by Obama, Clinton, Rice, and others. Many Americans are buying the lie, and the media is selling the lie. The people behind this are laughing at us. Don’t you get it? They’re laughing at us.
And do you want to know what’s at stake? Four Americans were killed in Benghazi. Forty thousand have been killed so far in Syria. Tens of thousands of Syrian people have become refugees. Why? For what? To advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia. For oil.

You know, the so-called right wing establishment were all up in arms about Obama’s submissive bow to the Saudi King. Where are they now? Where’s the outrage that the body count will be much greater than Forty thousand? It is anticipated that if the Obama plan succeeds, not only will America be committed to yet another war, but the body count could be as high as FOUR MILLION. Christians, among others, will be slaughtered. This could trigger a third world war, it’s that serious.

What are Russia and Iran doing? Certainly, they must be fighting back.
Benghazi was a strike against us, the Obama-Clinton agenda. A visible strike, and I’ll explain more about this shortly, because there are events I will point out that will put it all into perspective. But think of it this way. How did we successfully collapse the Soviet Union? I mean, what was the last straw? We attacked their currency – the Ruble. They’re still stinging from that, and Putin was in the KGB at the time. Do you think he forgot about that?
So, how do, or will Russia and Iran strike back if Obama and Clinton continue this insanity? Militarily? Possibly in regional conflicts, but to take us out, to stop us, what is the one area where we are very vulnerable? It’s our economy – our dollar. What’s our dollar tied to? Not gold or silver anymore, and some say it’s not tied to anything. Well, that’s not quite correct. It’s tied to OIL. The free-flow of oil.

Oil transactions everywhere in the world, including Russia and China, are made with U.S. dollars. We buy their oil with our dollars, and they return with those same paper dollars and employ Americans by buying our goods and services. As Michael Reagan wrote: “[t]his system is also crucial to the security of our diplomatic and legal infrastructure, which is ultimately backed by our military. It’s the core of our foreign policy.” He also wrote that “any attack on the free flow of oil is an attack on the dollar. Any attack on the dollar is an attack on our ability to project power and protect Western democracies, economies, and ideals. God have mercy on us all if that attack is successful!”
Benghazi: Behind the scenes (Part II)

Author’s note: This is part two of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. It is important to note that the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. In this part, the insider provides information about the events of the attack and the continuation of the cover-up at the highest levels of our government.

We’ve heard different accounts and different timelines concerning the attack at Benghazi. What exactly happened?

First, people must understand that the compound that was attacked was situated in a somewhat rural area and was not a consulate, but a rented villa, or a residential structure. The residence was the primary building, and what has been referred to as the annex was located about 1800 feet away as the crow flies, but just over a mile to travel by road. And again, visible security was not present as the compound was the headquarters for a covert operation. No one wanted to draw attention to what was taking place at this location.

The first indications of problems there began at least twelve-(12) hours before the first shot was even fired. One of the men at the compound observed a policeman or Libyan security officer taking photographs outside of the villa. Keep in mind that Ambassador Stevens, the point man in this Obama-sanctioned weapons running operation, was hastily scheduled to meet with the Turkish consul general at this location. The meeting was deliberately planned for dinner time, toward evening, when the events that happened next could be performed under the cover of darkness.

It’s also important to consider the location of this meeting. Tripoli is the seat of power in Libya, and a genuine diplomatic meeting could more safely have been conducted there, at the embassy. Also, what most people don’t know is that Libya is split, much like East and West Germany before the wall. The eastern part is more closely aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, the same group that controls Egypt. The Turkish consul general had to meet there, not just with Stevens but with other factions involved in this covert operation.
Now I’ll digress for a moment. It is reasonable to ask whether the Turkish consul general was setting Stevens up for a hit, like a classic mob-style hit. First, there is no dispute that there was surveillance done at 6:30 a.m. and intermittently throughout the day. Next, consider that three hours before the first shot was fired, about 6:30 p.m. local time, some strange things were observed taking place near the compound. Military type vehicles began closing of the streets with trucks that had 50 caliber guns mounted on them. Checkpoints on the streets and at intersections were being quietly closed off around the compound. Nearby residents began going inside their homes. Anyone walking in the area got off the streets, like a scene from a movie in the Godfather series. It was obvious that the stage was being set for a strike against the compound. This alone reveals preplanning and coordination.
It’s also noteworthy to point out that the Turkish counsel general most likely passed through one or more of these checkpoints, or at least would have noticed that things were not right in the area. You must remember that just as Stevens was previously CIA working under diplomatic cover, the Turkish counsel general was his counterpart. It’s typical spy-versus-spy stuff.

Also consider this. One of the men stationed at the compound, a British national, left the compound at about 9:20 p.m., reportedly to get more phone cards. That’s right, phone cards, like you would buy at Walmart. Why? Because the men at the compound ran out of minutes. Just who do you think they were talking to that day to burn through the minutes, and why do you think they needed them at that exact time?

They were using the phones as a last and perhaps only line of communications to provide assessments of the strange things going on earlier. They knew that something was being planned and they were conveying that information – their observations to those who could assist them, in Tripoli and DC.

Based on these activities, it is clear that the men at the compound suspected that they were in trouble long before the first shot was ever fired. They were calling anyone who would listen, or who should have listened. We knew trouble was brewing and no one responded in any meaningful way.
Could the man who left to buy more phone cards have known what was about to take place?

Well, it’s possible, but there is no indication of that.

Was the Turkish counsel general in on this, to set Stevens up?

Well, what have we heard from our government? Has anyone even bothered to interview him? What did he say? Don’t forget, this administration decided to handle this attack as a crime and not a terrorist attack. How long did it take for the FBI to be able to access the ‘crime scene’ after the attack? More importantly, what was left at the ‘crime scene’ to examine by the FBI due to this delay? Do you think the delay was accidental?

Do you know what was discussed, or the reason for the meeting between Stevens and the Turkish consul general?

Yes, I know some key points. First, keep in mind what this arms running operation was all about. It was to topple Assad and replace him with a Muslim Brotherhood leader. It was to destabilize Syria to advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia. They were using U.S. and NATO forces to do exactly that.
However, Assad is no Gaddafi, and there is no comparison between Assad’s army and the Libyan army. It would take much more than rebels inside Syria to topple Assad. There is no way on earth that the Syrian rebels, or Free Syrian Army, has the capability to accomplish this objective alone. It required U.S. assistance, arms and training.

Now, Turkey is a NATO ally. They were assisting the Obama-Clinton-Saudi plan to funnel weapons ultimately to Syria, but the primary staging areas for these weapons were in Turkey near the Syrian border. Visual surveillance by Russia, using satellites and other means amassed photographic documentation of the U.S. assisting the ‘anti-Assad rebels’ inside Turkey. They developed evidence of the U.S. training these rebels and assisting them into Syria to fight against Assad.

Think about this. What if surveillance images observed anti-Assad rebels being trained to handle and mount chemical weapons – gas shells – onto rockets? The process would be apparent and would obviously be detected by a number of visual indicators. Obviously, Syria wanted this to stop. By extension, so did Russia.

One aspect of the weapons plan was to set up a false flag operation to make it appear that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. Imagine the outcry from the civilized world to the news that Assad ‘gassed’ his own people. That would be an invitation to NATO and the West to openly intervene. Don’t forget about the timing of all of this. Two months before the elections, and time was running out. The job of taking out Assad was not yet complete. Such an event would quickly advance this agenda. By this time, however, being caught and placed in a rather unenviable position between Russia and the U.S., the Turkish consul general was in a ‘CYA, clean-up’ mode, assuring that none of the chemical weapons that might have still been in Libya were headed for Turkey.

It is also important to understand that the covert weapons running operation was just about finished. An estimated 40 million pounds of weapons were already shipped from Libya, and things were winding down.

There was another issue as well, a very important and telling one. Seven members of the Iranian Red Crescent had been kidnapped or snatched from the streets of Benghazi on or about July 31, 2012. Again you must understand that virtually anyone walking on the streets of Benghazi not indigenous to the area are spies. Covert operatives, operating under various covers. From all nations.

Along with the message that the weapons running operation was compromised, the Iranians had good reason to suspect that the ‘Red Crescent workers’ were snatched by the CIA or with their assistance. Iran wanted them back. They were spies, and countries want their spies back! So part of the meeting was to address this, as there was pressure by Russia against a wavering Turkey to switch sides. Anyway, you’ll see how this ties in to the way the actual attack was executed.

Please continue.

So at 9:30 pm local time, the compound began to take on small arms fire. Based on all reports I’ve reviewed, there were three twelve-man attack teams armed with small arms, RPGs, and other sophisticated military style weapons. These were not run-of-the-mill street weapons, but military issued type weapons. The types of weapons alone scream that this was a preplanned attack.

Eyes on the area [author’s note: satellites, surveillance drones] confirmed that two of these teams surrounded the villa and the annex. The third team was elsewhere, lying in wait. The two teams began their assault on the compound where Stevens was inside about an hour after the Turkish counsel general left. Remember, he had to pass the checkpoints after the meeting. Just keep that in mind.

Anyway, we all know now that there was an intense firefight that lasted nearly nine hours during which four Americans, Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty and Tyrone Woods were killed. And of course that attack was not over a video and there were no protests before the attack.
Now there are questions that are not being asked. The two well-armed ‘hit teams’ had the capability to reduce the compound and annex to rubble quickly. Why a protracted firefight? There are a couple of reasons.
First, what was the makeup of the ‘hit teams,’ or who were the attackers? We have verified that the attackers were a combination of members of Ansar al Sharia and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), but they were operating under the flag of Ansar al Sharia. Who is Ansar al Sharia? Iranian terrorists. They are a terrorist group that receives their training by and funding from Iran. Now think about this. Carefully consider the implications here. IRAN. It’s the elephant in the room no one wants to mention or talk about.
The attack on our ambassador and our people – Americans – was an attack by Iran. It was an attack at a nation-state level.

AQIM also assisted. They are indigenous to Africa and are extremely dangerous. AQIM is a very ‘elite’ and extremely well-funded group, and very limited in number. Our last assessment suggests that there are only 400 or so members, but they are very influential across Africa and into South and Central America and Western Europe. Their importance and relevance will become evident shortly.

The reason that they did not just take out the compound and everything and everyone in it is that they were looking for their spies. Remember the Red Crescent workers? The Iranian spies? They suspected that they might be held at the annex. As such, they wanted to free them and did not want to risk killing them.

Oh, and there were others ‘missing’ as well. AQIM members. These were terrorists involved in drug running operations from the Tri-border (TBA) areas of South America through North Africa and into Western Europe. By the way, this is the way they made their money. Drugs sell at higher profits in Western Europe than elsewhere, so there is money to be made. The problem is that some of them got caught—snatched up in Benghazi and northeastern Libya.
Now regarding AQIM, this has a direct connection not only to South America, but also to Mexico and Mexican drug gangs. You think that what’s going on in Libya is just ‘over there,’ and far away from the U.S. and has nothing to do with our safety and security? Think again, but more on this in a bit.

There’s also another reason. The hit teams fully expected rescue teams from the U.S. to be dispatched to the compound. Certainly, calls for help went out. By waiting for the back-up or rescue forces, a surprise assault by the other ‘hit team’ team would have exposed our forces to possible causalities and turned the event into a much bigger event where the actual nature of the operation could be exposed to the world. Instead of being a cover-up for which they have yet to be held accountable, it would have been an international incident that would have exposed the entire affair.
So the Ansar al Sharia attack groups deliberately conducted a protracted assault on the compound. Just imagine, our men and even the bad guys never expected team Obama would leave our people twisting in the wind, fighting for their lives. That alone should speak volumes to every American.
As daylight approached, they had to wrap things up so they could disappear under the cover of darkness. Oh, and the crowds that are often cited by this administration, did form in the area as the attack progressed, much like a growing mob in riot. They provided the fog, or the cover, that permitted the attackers to escape amid the crowd.

You mentioned the missing Iranian Red Crescent workers and members of AQIM. Were they ever released or found?

Yes, and this is an extremely important part of this entire story. This reaches into the highest levels of our government. This is so very important that it must be addressed separately.

So the attack was first and the crowd came later. I noted that the administration said that there were protests going on at the Embassy in Cairo at the same time and they compared it to Benghazi.
Yes, that’s their cover story and they know that there is absolutely no comparison. This is one huge lie that is easily addressed and put out of its misery.

How soon did U.S. intelligence officials know who was responsible for the attack?

Almost immediately, if not concurrent with the attack. Every part of that area is under active aerial surveillance by the U.S. There was SIGINT or communication intercepts at the time of the attack. Then, there was even an admission by the attackers. Obama knew. Hillary knew. Clapper knew. Everyone knew, expect the American people. And you know what? The American media knew as well.

I heard a statement that they did not admit knowledge to avoid alerting the perpetrators.

Yes, it was said that Rice and others did not want to alert the ‘bad guys’ or tip their hand or some such nonsense, but did that mean that Susan Rice, for example, had to appear on national television and lie to every one of us, to the country? In my opinion, Rice took on the temporary job of propaganda minister for a day in exchange for a shot at Secretary of State in the future.
You are painting quite a dire picture.

It gets worse, much worse, and it involves real threats across the globe and even to us here in the United States. But it’s all because of our actions, the covert weapons running from Libya to Syria by way of Turkey at the direction of Barack Obama and his Saudi ‘handlers.’

FORTY THOUSAND men, women and children are dead in Syria as a direct result of this attempt at nation building, or tearing down Assad. There are four dead Americans. We are arming some of the very people who are killing our troops. Not only are we on the wrong side of this, we are actively pushing the world to the precipice of World War III.

We are engaged in a real war here with Iran and Syria and by extension, with Russia and China. And we are being lied to about it every step of the way. And the lies are getting worse, but so are the attempts to stop the truth from getting out.

What do you mean?

What do you think the recent directive issued by Obama, the one you wrote about ‘insider threats,’ is all about? Obama does not want the American people to know the truth about what is going on. He’s doubled down to stop leaks, like this. But you know what? He just might be too late, because we’re not done here. I’m not done talking, and there’s much more that needs to be exposed.

Author’s note: This is part three of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. As previously stated, the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. Included in this update is the most current information following a more recent interview with this insider. (Click here for Part I and Part II).

Events seem to be changing rapidly in Syria, and we know that the operations in Benghazi played a very important role in Syria. Please update the readers on the current situation, but first give a brief recap for context.
Okay, but we’re running out of time. The world is running out of time. Remember when we first began this lengthy interview process? It was in response to your report on September 15, 2012, just four days after the attack in Libya. You wrote that the fuse for WW III has been lit. It is now burning rapidly down, although people are still not understanding what’s taking place right in front of them.

I’ll give a brief, perhaps somewhat oversimplified recap going back to the beginning, giving context for what’s taking place at this very moment. I suppose I cannot overstate this or say this enough. The so-called “Arab Spring” is an initiative by Obama and his foreign policy advisers, Clinton, in her capacity of Secretary of State, and others including some of the most powerful people in the world. International bankers, the power brokers and string pullers. It is a plan to reshape the Middle East and North Africa, and change the geopolitical balance of power. It’s not about some feel-good mission to free the oppressed. Never was. It’s about the U.S., through the CIA, using groups ideologically aligned to al Qaeda aligned to overthrow various Middle East nations to install regimes controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.

It’s a globalist agenda, using the blueprints and agenda created by Saudi Arabia for the North African and Middle East portions of the globe, to shape that area geopolitically. They are using the United States as their surrogate and their military muscle, and the Obama led U.S. “regime” is all too willing to comply.

With regard to Libya, it was in March of 2011 when the Clinton State Department, under orders of Obama, appointed Ambassador Stevens as the point man to the al Qaeda linked Libyan opposition forces to topple Qaddafi. Remember, Osama bin Laden was reportedly killed two months later and al Qaeda was supposedly out of existence, according to Obama. But think about this. Under direct orders of Obama, Clinton appointed Stevens to work with the very same people who reportedly killed 3000-plus Americans on September 11, 2001 for the purposes of overthrowing Qaddafi. It worked, and Qaddafi was deposed and murdered in October of 2011.

Look at what happened next. Clinton announced that the U.S. was throwing $40 million into Libya to “secure” Qaddafi’s weapon arsenals. Oh, really? That’s what was being told to the public and to congress, but it’s not reality, certainly not from the inside. As I’ve already explained, that money and our personnel were being used to collect the weapons to send them to Syria to topple Assad. Before getting to Syria, they were placed in staging areas in Turkey near the Syrian border, and other places, including Jordan. They were being collected and sent through northern Libya, and the CIA operations center was the headquarters for this operation. As I’ve said many times, there was no embassy or consulate in Benghazi. It was a covert CIA operations center.

Wait, why do people continue to call it a consulate? Why is it identified on Google maps as a consulate.

First, it continues to be called a consulate because this is part of the cover-up. The government is STILL lying to the American people. The media is assisting in the cover-up, and so are some in congress in both parties. For goodness sakes, anyone looking at Google maps on September 10, 2012 will never find the Benghazi location named a consulate. It’s a LIE!

Sorry, please go on.

So every American understands, it is OUR tax money in part that was used to arm Islamic groups ideologically aligned with al Qaeda. Imagine that. Eleven years after 9/11, we’re funding and assisting the very same terrorists who attacked our country to topple another country. And other countries are in this up to their necks as well. The Brits for one. The very country or empire that created some of the post-war borders, many knowingly unmanageable from the outset, is now in part responsible for changing them.

Anyway, the weapons everyone in government said that were “collected” and destroyed were pieces of junk that never worked. The working weapons, including an estimated 10-15,000 shoulder fired missiles were shipped out of Libya. Stevens was the head of logistics, coordinating this operation. He was working with the Turkish consul general as well, the guy who met with him on the night of his death. We already went over this in detail.

The attack was perpetuated by Ansar al-Shariah, an Islamic terrorist group backed by Iran. Also present were members of the terror group AQIM, or al Qaeda in Northern Africa. It was a coordinated attack for a purpose, and never, ever had anythig remotely to do with any internet video.

Please touch on the nature of the attack again for those just catching up
As I explained before, I have information that three “hit teams” were dispatched to Benghazi[iii]. Stevens was lured to the CIA compound to talk about Russia’s knowledge of what the U.S. was doing – running weapons to be used against Assad in Syria, which is Russia’s “red line.” They needed to talk and not at the embassy, but at this out of the way location. The weapons running operation, although it was winding down anyway, was compromised. Over. Done. It is likely that the Turkish consul general told Sevens that the Russians had evidence – proof, of weapons in Turkey, including chemical weapons. Turkey, a NATO ally being squeezed by Russia, wanted the weapons gone from their turf. We also had people up there training the “rebels” on how to use the weapons as well. You heard about training exercises in that area on or about September 11, 2012? Who do you think we were training? Right after the Turkish counsel general left, the attack against the CIA compound began.

What was the reason for the attack?

Remember the story of the Iranian Red Crescent workers being “snatched” from the streets of Benghazi late on July 31 or the early morning of August 1, 2012? This happened at the same time the CIA compound wall was hit by a mortar. These Red Crescent workers were spies. At the same time, some members of the terror group AQIM were also picked up in Benghazi. It was a mystery! Where did they go? Who had them?

The belief was that they were being held at the CIA compound. Iran wanted them back. So, in addition to everything else, Ansar al Shariah was looking for their people. AQIM were looking for their people too. This is the reason the compound was not immediately leveled by the weapons they had on sight. They were trying to find and free their people, who were not being held there, but elsewhere. They were trying to ‘smoke” the people out of the compound and rescue the “hostages.”

Plus, a message had to be sent to Obama, Clinton and others that the weapons operation had to stop. The groups leading the attack, primarily Ansar al Sharia with an AQIM presence as well, were tools of Iran, Syria and of course, Russia.

So there were two reasons for the attack: get their spies back, and expose this operation for what it was. Again, we went over this.

The snatched Red Crescent Workers play prominently into exposing this operation.

Yes, and here is where it gets interesting. They were released exactly 65 days after they were snatched. They were in good health and dropped off on the streets of Tripoli. But why then? This is where it get’s damning to Obama, Clinton, and Valerie Jarrett.

What is not widely known to Americans is that Obama sent Iranian born Valerie Jarrett to Qatar for high level talks with the Iranians about coming to an agreement before the November elections. This, despite Jarrett not having the capacity as official of the U.S. government. She had no business doing what she was doing. That aside, the plan was that Jarrett would broker a deal, and Obama would announce to the world that he had succeeded in diplomatic negotiations with the Iranians where they would halt their nuclear weapons ambitions and Obama would officially live up to his title as savior of the world.

But before the talks kicked into high gear, the Iranians told Jarrett that the Red Crescent workers had to be released before any talks could be done in earnest. Jarrett relayed that to Obama and Clinton, and then, out of nowhere, the missing workers were suddenly released.

If there were talks and the “spies” were released, then why was there no agreement?

Because Jarrett, Obama and Clinton were being played by the Iranians. It was to buy time, especially since the Obama agenda of arming the anti-Assad rebels was continuing. The Iranians are not stupid. They understood that Obama and Clinton were continuing to support the anti-Assad rebels, and with bipartisan support, STILL ARE!

So now we are hearing reports of chemical weapons planned for use by Assad. What’s the real story?

The world is being set up for a false flag operation. Obama, Clinton and every supporter of the anti-Assad initiative are either lying to the American people or are “dupes.” The objective remains taking out Assad and replacing him with a Muslim Brotherhood-backed regime.

There have been reports out of the U.S. and the UK that Assad is preparing to use chemical weapons against the rebels. Assad denies that he would ever use them, and there is a reason we should believe him in this case. The condemnation that would result is unnecessary and certainly unwarranted. There reports are to condition people to immediately suspect Assad when a chemical incident occurs. In this case, it’s the U.S., the UK and other Western backed countries constantly asserting that Assad will launch a chemical attack, and we’re getting ready just for that case.

But if you look at the evidence, it’s the anti-Assad, Western backed forces that have taken possession of chemical storage areas. There was a recently released video, very graphic in nature of anti-Assad rebels conducting the test of a nerve agent on two rabbits. The video displayed chemicals bottles with the name of a Turkish country on them. I’m not going to give the name or video channel, but people can find the video for themselves on YouTube. It’s a set-up to topple Assad and put a Muslim brotherhood leader in his place.
I told you before, and you printed what I said, that a chemical weapon attack would justify U.S. and NATO intervention, supported by the outcry of the world against Assad. It’s Iraq all over again, except Syria is a hundred times more dangerous. Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan or even Libya, Syria will not implode. It will EXPLODE, and we will be fighting Iranians as well. Russia has “advisers” in Syria as well. Are the American people ready and willing to square off against Iran AND Russia in a regional conflict that will likely turn into a global, full scale war?

What’s going on with Turkey, Syria and Russia now?

It was announced that Turkey will receive patriot Missiles to protect them from the spillover. Actually, these missiles over the northern territory of Syria will create a de-facto no fly zone that will allow the consolidation of anti-Assad rebels to perhaps install a new Western-backed government in the northern part of Syria[vii].

And you know what else? Sunburn missiles are at Iran’s disposal and can be used in that theater. Regardless of what is written or talked about by talking heads, these missiles poses a grave threat to our aircraft carriers. Want to see how fast we can lose an aircraft carrier and the several thousand crew members on board? This is what we face.

Russia is doubling down, Iran is doubling down. Assad is doubling down. Meanwhile, Obama and the U.S. State Department continue to lie to the American people. The lie continues, and the fuse to WW III is burning down while the Obama regime is heading full steam ahead toward regional and global war.

Why haven’t we heard any truth about Benghazi, even from congressional investigators?

Because the lie continues, and we are still supporting the overthrow of Assad, despite Putin’s warnings. Obama, Clinton, the global leaders and their financiers are continuing to lead us into World War III. The lies continue, and to continue operations, the truth must be kept from the American public. We are continuing our operations to overthrow Assad at full throttle right in front of all Americans. And there will be fallout.

In addition to four dead Americans and over 40 thousand dead Syrians, the consequences of our actions will cause the death of an estimated FOUR MILLION in Syria alone, many Christians. When, not if the “conflict” escalates, we’ll see many millions dead. And for what?

Okay, what’s the objective here?

Behind the smoke and mirrors is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It’s their agenda. We’re just providing the army, the training, performing the logistics and doing the heavy lifting. It’s the Saudi agenda, and it’s about power, control and oil. Who do you think controls the Muslim brotherhood? Has anyone asked why Obama, raised in a Muslim culture, is tied at the hip with the Muslim Brotherhood?

Why aren’t Americans angry that we are using our assets, our men and women to advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia under the orders of Barack Hussein Obama?

Why are members of congress so quick to commit our forces to oust Assad when it benefits Saudi Arabia, not the U.S?

The agenda of Obama is so overt, so “in your face” yet not one member of congress, not one media outlet is calling him out on this. Some might call this mere conspiracy theory. There’s a conspiracy alright, but it involves the government and the media. They are laughing in our faces.

In addition to the obvious regional consequences, there will be blowback from the Obama-Clinton agenda.

What type of blowback?

Well, let’s first look at what’s happened already as this insane Obama agenda has been going on for some time. Remember the plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the U.S? On October 11, 2011, the FBI announced that a plot, identified by the FBI as “Operation Red Coalition,” was foiled to kill Saudi ambassador Adel al-Jubeir in the United States. It was alleged that Iranian nationals were working with a Mexican drug gang to kill al-Jubeir with a bomb while he was dining at a DC restaurant. Do you think he would have been the only one to die there if that plan succeeded? No, innocent men, women and children would have died as well.

Many in the media and the talking heads were having trouble understanding why Iran or Iranian nationals would want the Saudi Ambassador dead. Well, in the context of what you know now, does this make a bit more sense? These events do not happen in a vacuum.

But I’m sure people will question why members of a Mexican drug cartel would be enlisted to assist in this operation? This gets a bit complex, but it goes back to AQIM. Remember them? That’s al Qaeda in Northern Africa. They are an elite Muslim terror group of perhaps 400 or so members. They carefully screen their members, and do a lot of subcontracting. Despite being Muslim, they are running drugs from South America, specifically the Tri-Border Area (TBA) into North Africa for ultimate distribution into Europe. Why Europe instead of North America? Because the drugs are worth more there, and the profit difference is worth it.

While drugs are being funneled from South America, terror groups are also funneling al Qaeda terrorists or terrorists of similar ideology into South America and into Mexico, where they are entering the United States. Think of it as a two-lane highway. Some of these terrorists have been caught at the southern border of the U.S., some with tattoos on their arms of mullahs and Islamic phrases of jihad. Why? Because when the Syria-Iran situation goes hot, there will be terrorists already inside the United States. But we created them and gave them the reason to be here. A few AQIM members, running the drugs east, were caught in Benghazi, which explains their presence and getting picked up there as well.

So Ansar al Shariah and AQIM, both present at Benghazi, were looking for their people.

But back to the blowback, or the consequences of the Obama foreign policy agenda. There is more, and it much more serious.

Attacks in the U.S?

For all intents and purposes, the United States, Russia and China are at war. Although the situation in Syria is being described as a civil war, it is the direct result of U.S. involvement by Obama and Clinton at the behest of Saudi Arabia. While real bullets are flying in Syria, an asymmetrical war exists beyond the confines of Syria’s borders.

Remember, Putin has drawn a hard line in the sand at Syria. The stability of Syria is of extreme strategic economic and military importance to Russia as well as China. Although no hot war exists between Russia, China and the U.S. at the moment, that does not mean things are not taking place behind the scenes in ways that are not readily apparent.

One of the biggest threats to the United States right now is an attack on the U.S. Dollar. At this moment, the fate of the U.S. dollar hangs in the balance. What is the U.S. dollar backed by? Gold? Silver? Neither. Some say the dollar is not backed by anything, and although they might be technically accurate, it’s not entirely true. At this moment, the dollar is backed by one important thing, which is oil. The stability of the dollar rests on the free and unimpeded flow of oil. Once that is interrupted or even threatened, there is a high degree of risk that the dollar will collapse.

The “string pullers” are pulling us into a situation where our actions result in the disruption or the threat of disruption of the free flow of oil. Given the current state of our economy, how fast might this bring down the United States without a shot having to be fired?

Now I know I’m stepping out into some areas that people might consider to be fringe, but think about what is taking place in the U.S. and across the globe. People talk about global governance, or a one order under a single currency. What’s the quickest way to destroy a country from within? What was the major reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union? Remember the Ruble? I can tell you this, Putin does.

So at this point, what’s an expeditious way to strike at the very heart of America while also accomplishing other larger global objectives? Take out the U.S. dollar.

We are in a period of heightened risk and maximum vulnerability, put here by Obama, his foreign policy advisers, czars, and of course Hillary Clinton. What are their objectives, and those of his closest advisers, especially in terms of the fate of the U.S? Fundamental change in ways that can be hardly imagined.

Are you saying that the larger objective is to destroy America?

I’m saying that we are advancing the agenda of Saudi Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood in North Africa and the Middle East. We’re doing their work, pitting ourselves against Syria, Iran and ultimately Russia and China. Syria and Iran are firewalls for Russia and China. Russia and China understand the monster created and used by the United States, they understand the Muslim Brotherhood backed terrorists. They will not stop at Syria. They will continue to push into the Federation of Russian States, disrupt oil flow, overthrow nations and threaten the security and sovereignty of Russia and threaten China. We’re playing with fire, and to expect no consequences is ridiculous.

The path that Obama continues to take, without any objection from congress or others in the U.S., will lead us on a path to self destruction. Perhaps the ultimate question is whether it is by incompetence or by design.

This is sickening and I have to admit I cried after I read this article. Think of the southern borders, Americans stationed throughout the world. We are paying the same people who attacked us on 9/11/2001. Really? Obama’s real need to get our guns, could it be he fears a revolution when this news gets out. People will be very, very angry that the President lied, Clinton lied and everyone in the his administration past and present have lied. The mainstream media knew and hid the misdeeds. Why the President constantly feels the need to hid his cover-ups they always come to the surface. This is why he’s pushing Chuck Hagel, he is weak, whiny, hypocritical, soft skinned liberal (RINO), who will happily hide his bosses crimes across the World and the same reason idiot Kerry, will continue what Hillary started. I’m now thinking that hit on the head was just a long delay so the Obama, Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod could come up with a plan.

I don’t know about you, but I’m planning to forward the article to the Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee and to Tom Filton of Judicial Watch, Michael Reagan, Rush Limbaugh and Jim DeMint at Heritage Foundation. We need someone to file a Freedom of Information Act now, everything on Benghazi, EVERYTHING. I hope you all do the same. Someone like Kelly Ayotte, John McCain or Lindsey Graham.

I guess we can say “follow the money” Saudi money and we all know the Clinton’s history with Saudi Arabia and the $15 million ways the Clinton’s love them, each year.

The Saudis are definitely involved. Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal paid to send Obama to Harvard. Al-Waleed’s has a 7% share of News Corp., the parent company of Fox News. “Fox News is, in effect, controlled by Al-Waleed bin Talal, working with Rupert Murdoch, also foreign-born, as a partner. They have no real loyalty to America, as a nation. ” If Fox News had fully reported the real truth about Obama he would never have been elected president. Fox News is not pro-American, and are controlled by foreign-born, globalist and Islamist owners.

Author’s note: This is a special supplement of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. It is important to note that the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. My source requested that the following information be written separately due to its importance.

DH: You told me that you wanted to talk about the lies behind Benghazi, said it is critical for everyone to understand the reason for the lies and asked that we do this separately. Go ahead.

II: It’s about the lie, and once you understand it, it becomes extremely revealing. It’s about what the public has been told from the very beginning. Do you realize that a lot of people, especially Obama’s associates and supporters do not believe that they’ve been lied to? Do you understand that much of the public does not believe that they were lied to? Like a lot of us, you’re in this thing so deep that we forget not everyone even believes they’ve been lied to. They’re certainly not going to hear about it in the media. To understand how deep this goes, how important it is, and why it is so important, we’ve got to go back to the very beginning.

Think back to when we were first told that Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Dougherty, Tyrone Woods were killed in Benghazi. The media reported that Stevens and the others were killed in an attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. Every major media outlet identified the location of the attack as an American consulate, much like this Reuters report and this from The Washington Times. But there was no U.S. consulate in Benghazi, so where did this information originate?

DH: Didn’t the administration call it a consulate?

II: Exactly. Our embassies and consulate offices are directly under the control of the U.S. State Department. They are areas of sovereign territory. Consulate offices are like satellite offices to each embassy, and they are located in convenient geographic locations in other countries to assist people with routine or minor matters, saving them a trip to the actual embassy. Consulates are easily identifiable and all have U.S. flags flying prominently for easy identification. A listing of U.S. embassies and consulate offices in other countries can be found on the State Department web site. Just about everyone working at State knows the locations of the embassies and consulates, as do most of our leaders in the executive branch.

So from the outset, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama certainly knew, without any doubt, that there was no consulate or diplomatic mission in Benghazi. None. In fact, on August 27, 2012, just 15 days before the attack in Benghazi, Ambassador Chris Stevens ceremoniously opened the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli with the U.S. State Department issuing press releases and official statements. Tripoli was the only diplomatic mission in Libya – period. And it was just established.

So one of the very first lies was to deliberate misidentify or improperly characterize the compound in Benghazi as a consulate. Was there an American flag flying outside of this compound? No. Was any diplomatic legitimate business being conducted at this compound? No. But they called it a consulate to draw attention away from the fact this was a CIA base of operations.

It was located in a relatively rural area, and it consisted of a residence and a separate “annex” located about 1800 feet away. By car, the annex was just over a mile away. It was difficult to find, too. People coming from Tripoli to this compound often got turned around, even with the help of a GPS.
So the very first thing everyone must understand is that the administration, including Barack Obama and others in the executive branch, and the State Department, including Hillary Clinton (her official statement identified the compound as a mission, suggesting a ‘diplomatic mission’) knew that this compound served no legitimate diplomatic purpose. That’s the first lie.
DH: We now know that it was a CIA compound located in a somewhat rural area and not identifiable as U.S. owned or operated.

II: Correct. So think about this. The compound was unmarked, operationally discreet, located in a rural area and difficult to find. How did a few hundred protesters suddenly gather at this location on the evening of 9/11? How did they know where to go, if this was not an embassy or consulate? More to the point, how is it possible that anyone in any official capacity in this administration could realistically describe the attack in terms of a protest gone bad, even at the first reports of trouble? They could not. This was a deliberate lie to the American people.

So how is it that U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, five days after the attack and after much of the initial dust settled, appeared on five national news shows and still attributed the murders of Americans as a result of protests? Who told her to do that? And, she continued to blame the murders on an obscure internet video. Why?

DH: They have since publicly reclassified the description of the location.

II: They had to because they could not continue to call the CIA operations center an embassy or consulate. But they have yet to offer any reasonable explanation for what happened there. Barack Obama has yet to look the family members of Tyrone Woods, Sean Smith, or Glen Dougherty in the eyes and tell the truth. He has yet to tell Americans the truth about the events of 9/11, and the reason for the lies, which continue through today. No one has stepped up to tell the truth. We have only seen denials reinforced by distractions. They continue to lie to this day. Who are they lying to and what is the logical reason for the lies?

They are only lying to the American people. All other governments know what’s going on. And most importantly, the reason they are continuing to lie is to cover up their plans as they are moving forward with their agenda. Everyone must understand how important this is. The Obama plan continues. No one is stopping them or this agenda. And in case you have any questions about what this agenda is, let me explain it clearly and concisely.

Obama, Clinton, their foreign policy advisors and the people involved in this agenda intend to start a war that will make Afghanistan and Iraq look like a small police action by comparison. They are going to start a war that will likely grow from a regional war to a global war, or WW III. Afghanistan ‘imploded’ when attacked, as did Iraq. Syria will not, it will explode. Do the American people understand this?

Until now, everyone has been focused on the ‘little lies.’ The security, the misidentification of the CIA compound, the timeline, and on and on. They want us to focus on the little lies so they can pull off the BIG LIE. The big lie being told is that the U.S. is merely providing minimal support, including humanitarian aid to the Syrians so they can defend themselves from Assad. That’s the big lie that covers up what they are really doing in the region.
The CIA compound in Benghazi was a logistics hub for weapons, but not only weapons from Libya. Weapons ordered by and destined for other countries, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other countries, knowing the plan, were allowing the weapons to be diverted, with Libya acting as the central shipping hub. When Assad falls and U.S. troops are called in for ground support, who will they be fighting? The Syrian army? No, they will be fighting the Iranian army, the Russian army and the Chinese army. Why? Because Iran, Russia and China all have a stake in the region. Putin called Syria his red line in the sand, and stated that WW III will start in Syria, not Iran.

Benghazi is a moving target of little lies that serve as cover for the big lie. Are Americans onboard?

Benghazi. Few Americans ever heard of the city in Libya until the murder of four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador, on September 11, 2012. Fewer still heard of the movie I, until it was suddenly blamed for a non-existent protest outside of a non-existent embassy in Benghazi within hours of the attack.

For two weeks in our nation’s history, the obscure and amateurish video was persistently and very publicly cited as the cause for the protests and murders in Benghazi by the highest ranking officials in the Obama administration.

Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, and others blamed the little known video for the attack on what was deliberately mischaracterized as a U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

Even today, the majority of officials in power don’t seem to want to talk about what happened in Benghazi, and Obama and Clinton repeatedly stonewalled all legitimate investigation of the incident. Why? Because any honest investigation into the activities taking place there would confirm a secret CIA operation intended to arm anti-Assad rebels, including the Iranian and Syrian backed Ansar al Sharia terror group. The purpose of this operation, the objective of which remains in place, is to topple Assad and replace him with a Saudi backed leader. Based on research and investigation, it appears that somewhere amid the magician’s fog of this illegal “black op” overthrow is John O. Brennan.

The Arabic-speaking John Brennan, who serves as Obama’s assistant for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and is the choice to head the CIA, has seen his share of exposure in the alternative media lately. Most recently, former FBI agent John Guandolo alleged that Brennan, while working as the CIA station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from 1996 to 1999, converted to Islam.
According to agent Guandolo, Brennan visited Mecca and Medina during the Hajj, which are traditionally off limits to non-Muslims during that period. Former agent Guandolo cites Brennan’s presence and his comments about his visits as evidence of his conversion.

Beyond his possible conversion to Islam, however, Brennan’s other actions are much more troubling, particularly as they relate to his past history with Obama, and more recent history related to Benghazi, drone warfare, and his involvement with an administrative “kill list.” It appears possible that, by nominating Brennan to be the nation’s top spy chief, Obama might be tying up loose ends that are shrouded by controversy. One loose end is the Benghazi operation and the manner in which an obscure Internet video was immediately blamed. Yet another loose end relates to Obama’s passport records while he was on the campaign trail in 2008. These two significant incidents involving questions and controversy, lies and murder, are like bookends to a four-year stint in a star chamber.

Based on extensive investigation by this author, the former might well relate to the latter, as determined by the “digital footprints” and historical digital records of both incidents. Investigation of both incidents finds common digital forensic factors that suggest that the same person or persons involved in the 2008 passport office break-in (or at least the same entities) might be involved in the dissemination of the video Innocence of Muslims immediately following the 2012 attacks in Benghazi. Or, it would appear that way.

It is the professional opinion of this author, holding certification in Internet Profiling, that both incidents, despite this four-year span, appear to involve companies associated with corporate entities serving, or otherwise connected to, the U.S. government. This was determined through analysis of the IP addresses used to upload and change certain characteristics of the video, among other investigative indications.

Based on this research and investigation, the one person identified as seeming to have some level of involvement in the midst of both incidents is John O. Brennan.

2008 Passport office break-in

It has been reported and confirmed that computer files maintained and managed by the United States Passport Office were illegally accessed on three separate occasions in 2008 as follows: 9 January 2008, 21 February 2008, and 14 March 2008. Although the initial story broke in The Washington Times on Thursday, 20 March 2008, an article containing additional information was published two days later, on Saturday, 22 March 2008.

At that time, it was disclosed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack that three (3) employees of two (2) separate government contracting firms were suspected in the “break-in,” and that the files access included those of then-Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain. The motives for the accessing of records was unclear, according to investigating officials. The firms that employed the suspects were identified as Stanley, Inc., a firm that employed two suspects, and The Analysis Corporation, that employed one suspect.

Of note is that, according to published reports, in 2006 the firm identified as Stanley, Inc. was awarded a $164 million government contract to print new U.S. passports. Despite the security breach, Stanley, Inc. (currently a wholly owned subsidiary of CGI Federal, Inc.) announced on 17 March 2008 that they were awarded a five-year, $570 million contract to continue support of the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services Directorate.
The contract services include the production, operational and business process support training, procurement, administration and evaluation of critical supplies, and facilities management support at the four Passport Centers, and 14 Passport Agencies nationwide, along with the Headquarters’ support offices.
The Analysis Corporation (TAC), based in McLean, Virginia is a wholly owned subsidiary and the intelligence division of Global Defense Technology & Systems, Inc. (GTEC), a defense contracting company that is “focused on mission-critical, technology-based U.S. national security solutions.” It has been since renamed Sotera Defense Solutions.

Founded in 1990, the Analysis Corporation has been working on counterterrorism and national security projects, including (but not limited to) maintaining national “watch-listing” activities. According to open source reports, the intelligence part of GTEC is staffed by former senior officials from the intelligence community. They are operationally involved with nearly every branch of the intelligence community, including the U.S. Department of State, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

It is important to note that two employees working for Stanley, Inc. were fired. A third employee of The Analysis Corporation was the primary focus of the ongoing investigation. At the time of the break-in, the Analysis Corporation was owned and operated by John O. Brennan (CEO from November 2005 to January 2009). It is also important to note that during this period, John O. Brennan served as a close advisor to Obama in 2008 on matters of intelligence and foreign policy. Following a 25-year career in the CIA, Brennan also worked with the campaign to elect Obama during his first presidential campaign.
With regard to the breach of the passport office files, revelations regarding the results of the government investigation appear to have fallen into a deep, black hole in terms of any publication of investigative findings. Aside from the termination of two of the three suspects, the legal disposition of their cases (including the employee of Stanley, Inc.) remains unknown.

Unintended consequence?

At the time of the passport office break-in, Barack Hussein Obama was on the campaign trail as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. The news of the breach was made public within a week of the last intrusion. A week later, on 21 March 2008, while Obama was campaigning, he was asked for his reaction by ABC News Jake Tapper.

It is obvious that Obama became officially aware that the public had been informed about the level of the breach, and that his personal and confidential biographical information, in addition to his international travels on his diplomatic and personal passport, were apparently “accessed.”

On April 8, 2008, Obama admitted, for the first time in any public venue as a presidential candidate, that he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. It is reasonable to ask whether Obama would have disclosed his Pakistan trip at this time had it not been for his uncertainty about whether or not the information had already been made public.

Even ABC News appeared surprised at this sudden and unexpected revelation, considering all of the talk about Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy during the previous several months. It is critical to understand that Obama never disclosed his Pakistan trip at any time during any policy discussions or debates prior to the passport office breach.

Mysterious death

Deeper investigation into the break-in found evidence that, in addition to the passport files, ancillary documentation of Obama, Clinton, McCain and several others was also compromised. Information that would facilitate identity fraud was also breached, as was the credit header information of various individuals. Based on this author’s most recent investigative findings, it is the professional belief of this author that this additional information provides the link between the break-in and an individual known as Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr. [Author’s note: “Lieutenant” (and all known spelling variations) is the individual’s given name, and does not represent any “rank” in any military or law enforcement agency.]

It is also important to point out that during the investigation of the breach of the passport office records, The Washington Times reported that “officials do not know whether information was improperly copied, altered or removed from the database during the intrusions” [Emphasis added]. As time progressed, so did the leaks. It was learned that at least one employee at the U.S. Department of State was a co-conspirator in the break-in.

According to published reports, that employee might have shared credit card information obtained during the breach with a man identified as Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr.

Based on the continued investigation of this author, it appears that Harris was the intended recipient of stolen credit card information from a State Department employee also involved in the breaches, but he received more than what he bargained for. When he realized the scope of the crime and the explosive nature of the information he possessed, he turned to investigators for protection. He also began to talk with investigators, and ultimately he made a deal with federal prosecutors.

Before he could make good on his deal, Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr. was found shot to death in his car on April 17, 2008, just over a month after the last breach. He was found in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in the northeast section of Washington. He had been shot once in the head.

The murder of Harris remains unsolved, and the official account of the murder is that Harris was either a victim of random violence, or his murder was a result of a “street deal gone bad.”

2012: Innocence of Muslims explained

In many ways, the video Innocence of Muslims can be compared to the bloody glove found at Rockingham, a reference to a piece of evidence in the infamous O.J. Simpson murder trial. The video is critical evidence in the murder of four Americans – men who died in a dusty land on the dark continent. Due to the lies perpetuated by those in office, they will be denied earthly justice as Americans continue to passively accept the contemptible hubris of those spinning such tales. In this investigation of multiple murders, felonious and even traitorous activities, however, the video provides important clues in the form of digital bread crumbs. These digital bread crumbs have left a trail directly to doorstep of agencies involved in playing a supporting role in U.S. counter-terror operations, and those in government they serve.

The video is the Achilles heel that serves to expose their nefarious cover-up.
Many perplexing questions remain unanswered about the video that Obama, Clinton, Rice, Carney and others blamed on the attack and murders in Benghazi. Although I’ve carefully documented the history of the video that ultimately came to be known as The Innocence of Muslims in a previous report (available here), a few key issues to summarize new and significant findings, however, need to be addressed.

First, it is the professional opinion of this author, based on extensive investigation, that the video was a “made-to-order” production by orders from – and payment by – our own intelligence community. The alleged producer of the video, publicly identified as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was associated with an individual known as Eiad Salameh, the cousin of Walid Shoebat, a man well known in counter-terrorism circles. According to Shoebat, Salameh was the subject of an extensive FBI investigation relating to a large scale fraud operation several years ago.

According to Mr. Shoebat, his cousin Salameh was in the sights of the FBI for three decades, had reportedly committed numerous federal crimes during this period known to the FBI, but was never arrested. This author was able to confirm that Salameh was connected to Nakoula, specifically for the purposes of this video, and that the activities of both were well known to the FBI at the highest levels. This author also confirmed that the facts presented by Mr. Shoebat in his 23-page report titled Anti-Muhammad Film “Innocence of Muslims” has a terrorist financier connection that includes major failures at the FBI, although disputes some of his conclusions based on evidence unavailable to him.

To be precise, it is the contention of this author, based on an examination of numerous court documents and the totality of evidence, that the video was created and produced by individuals who were acting as operational assets for the FBI. If this type of activity sounds familiar, it should as it is the same template that is commonly and frequently used by our government.

It is the same template used in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and numerous “terrorist” operations since.

It appears possible that the FBI had enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Salameh and his associates to send him to jail indefinitely. Because Salameh and his associates had contacts and were communicating with terrorists in other countries, the CIA became involved as well. Based on the evidence reviewed, it is the professional opinion of this investigator that the casual conduit between the FBI and the CIA was John Brennan, who was acting at the time as the assistant to President Barack Obama for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism operations. Brennan also had numerous contacts within the burgeoning world of private counter-intelligence companies and operatives.
From my investigative findings, it appears that the “order” for the video was placed in 2011, at the time the Arab Spring was gaining momentum. It was also a time when anti-Muslim sentiment and “hate speech” was gaining worldwide attention in the U.S.

A video to incite and inflame Muslims for the dual purpose of causing violent outbreaks for specific times and to create a catalyst to stifle any criticism of Islam was desired, although no legitimate film producer wanted the job nor could be trusted in this “black op” assignment. Accordingly, the FBI appears to have given Nakoula, who was associated with Salameh a choice between cooperation and prison. It appears that he chose the former option.

Using a combination of willing participants and people duped into co-operating, Nakoula used his connections to involve some more well-known members within the “anti-jihad” movement, many who would sign on to any such project without performing any due diligence investigation of the people behind the endeavor. While seeming to serve his handlers within the intelligence community, Nakoula was also working for his own personal gain. Despite its actual low budget, the cost to the intelligence agency funding it was high.
The production of the video began about 14 months before the Benghazi attack in July of 2011. The initial name of this production was called Desert Warrior, but was changed on 30 June 2012 to The Innocence of Bn [sic] Laden. The following day, it “premiered” at The Vine Theater in Los Angeles under that name in order to provide legitimacy. Promotional flyers, written in Arabic, were provided in advance of (and at) the opening. According to public accounts, however, no one showed up to watch the movie and it was quickly forgotten.
The roughly 14-minute video later appeared on the YouTube channel of a man known as Sam Bacile under the title The Real Life of Mohammed on 1 July 2012. Clearly, the video had been digitally manipulated in an obviously amateurish manner from the original filming to the final incarnation.

Replacement of the original dialogue to obviously antagonistic and insulting lines was clearly evident in the final video that appeared online.

If Nakoula had an operating budget provided by the CIA, why was the video such an obvious amateurish production? The reason, I was told by sources with knowledge of this video, is that much of the money was used by Nakoula and Salameh, who both had criminal histories involving fraud. Essentially, the FBI and the CIA were “out-conned” by a couple of convicted con artists.
Meanwhile, the U.S. operations in Benghazi were being shut down as the job had been mostly completed and the U.S. was getting pressure from the Turkish and Russian governments. The operatives in Benghazi needed a diversion to finish their operation. A large scale anti-U.S. demonstration in Tripoli, Cairo or elsewhere would serve as cover to wind things down in Benghazi and would divert and otherwise occupy the press.

Despite being poorly done, it is important to understand that the video already had its “legend” established. This explains the curiously odd “premier” at the Vine Theater, which was done not for public consumption, but to establish its fictitious pedigree. In the spy world, “legends,” or well-prepared synthetic histories of a person, or in this case a video, is vital.

Although far from perfect, the video Innocence of Muslims, having been virtually dormant on an internet channel for months, was suddenly “discovered” by Egyptian television host Sheikh Khalid Abdulla, who first aired the video on 9 September 2012. Well known in the world of counter-terrorism, Abdullah acted as the Middle East conduit for the otherwise useless video. Due to the persistent promotion of that video, protests broke out in Cairo and more importantly, at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.

How did Khalid Abdulla even find the obscure video? It is the professional opinion of this author that the answer might be found by identifying the YouTube channel (or channels) on which it was uploaded. Tracing the digital fingerprints of the various incarnations of the video from the first casting call when it was named Desert Warrior to its final birthing as Innocence of Muslims, there is an apparent connection to the IP address associated with Stanley, Inc., the company previously referenced in the passport office break-in. From there, the fingerprints get somewhat “smudged,” but a connection is possible to others in the counter-terrorism and defense industry serving the U.S. government. In short, Abdullah was “given” the video by our own intelligence community.

The motive was not only to cause a diversion, but to also facilitate the First Amendment rights of all Americans, especially as they relate to the criticism of Islam. If this sounds too far out or convenient, take a look at the background of John Brennan, who spent time throughout the Middle East, including Egypt. Furthermore, the U.S. intelligence agencies were heavily influencing the media within Egypt following the toppling of Mubarak and the installation of the Muslim Brotherhood backed regime.

Too much free speech is a bad thing

Even deeper investigation of John Brennan has taken this author to his 1980 graduate thesis titled Human Rights, A Case Study of Egypt he wrote while at the University of Texas at Austin. Based on an extensive review of his published thesis, it appears that Obama will have, as his top spymaster, someone in favor of government censorship, or media manipulation for government purposes. His thesis offers valuable insight into his thinking and logic, especially as it relates to his personal experiences in Egypt. Using such personal experience, Brennan seems readily able to justify government censorship actions as in the case of Egypt under Anwar Sadat. It is important to consider that in his thesis, Brennan argues that too much uncensored or unchecked freedom could be detrimental to Egypt’s political environment.
Brennan’s overtly pro-Islamic position is evident in the counter-terrorism policies within the U.S. intelligence community. One would be remiss not note the revisions performed to our internal counter-terrorism training manuals that removed all criticism of Islam under Brennan’s direction.

Given Brennan’s obvious pro-Islamic bias, the views he argued in his graduate thesis that include favoring government censorship under certain conditions, his history with the CIA, and his close ties to Obama, is it not reasonable to question Brennan’s activities while National Security Advisor to Obama during the Benghazi attack even in the absence of evidence already offered?

Specifically, is it not possible that the blueprint for use of the video not only to cause a necessary diversion, but to create a case against our First Amendment rights originated with Brennan at the behest of Obama?

Putting it all together

John Brennan, Obama’s pick for top U.S. spy, has recently come under fire for his stance on drone killings, secret kill lists, and in some circles, his alleged conversion to Islam. Some will consider Brennan the obvious choice to head the CIA, given his history with the agency. Few see a different side, a side possibly connected to unseemly activities involving crimes and cover-ups.

Those who object to John Brennan’s nomination are doing so on the basis of the obvious. Such examples include his support for enhanced interrogation techniques, drone use and the maintenance of a secret “kill list” from the star chamber of the White House.

There are many more important questions about Brennan that need to be asked and answered, but few will meet the challenge.

I believe I’ve identified questions about his role in the 2008 passport office security breach in which the file of Barack Obama, among others, was accessed. In that case alone, it is reasonable to wonder what information having significant political capital about Obama and others might be known to this spy legend? Has the spirit of J. Edgar been resurrected in Brennan?
How about his role in the murderous attacks in Benghazi and the subsequent cover-up? Or perhaps greater still, his role in the Saudi intelligence operation known as Arab Spring?

America has a history of creating great spies. America also has a history of turning out some who are adept at working all sides of an agenda, including the opposing sides. At this point in our nation’s history, can we afford to be anything except absolutely certain about the loyalty to our country, our Constitution, and our future of all of our appointees? Not until every question is asked, answered and verified.

References:
Egypt: A Case Study of Human rights (Thesis of John O. Brennan)

WOW ! That’s a lot of stuff to digest. But it also raises many questions.
Does the Muslim Brotherhood really expect to defeat China and Russia?
If war breaks out in the Middle East, and the flow of oil is disrupted, then wouldn’t it force the USA to get serious about drilling here, since our reserves exceed those in the Middle East, and then we can be independent of foreign oil ?

In this age of instant communications, is it possible that the rest of the world knows the truth of what happened in Benghazi ,and we don’t ? Granted , the LSM are pro OWEbaama, but they can’t stop all communication.